With due respect, you are probably aware that whatever we say here are mostly symbolic. As far as I know you do not have the power to influence Angola or Saudi Arabia.
The major difference between Angola and Saudi Arabia is there are NO native non-Muslim in Saudi Arabia. However there are NATIVE Angolans who are Muslims. They have no where else to go but to stay in THEIR country.
Saudi Arabia considers itself as "Vatican". So they set up the bar higher than rest of the Islamic countries. Except Saudi Arabia I do not know of any country which prohibits establishing religious temples or churches in them. There are Muslim countries (UAE, Turkey etc) which donated land for building churches. But they do not make news and you do not know about them.
I understand your position but it is not an informed one. It is based on fictional perception. However I respect it as "Your opinion".
Here is a little bit about this topic...
Muslim Community in Madagascar Donate Land for Christian Church
The Living Church Foundation reports that members of the Muslim community in a suburb of Ambilobe, Madagascar, have donated land to the Anglican Diocese of Antsiranana in the Province of the Indian Ocean. 
Source: http://www.breakingchristiannews.com/articles/display_art.html?ID=2222
My two cents...
Shalom!
-----Original Message-----
From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Fri, Nov 29, 2013 6:36 pm
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Angola Bans Islam, Destroys Mosques
I did not say – religious discrimination anywhere is ethical or right; not at all. In fact, my ethical mind tells me that - I cannot give a pass for such discrimination in one country, for whatever reason, and object it in other countries. That's discrimination, in my view. Therefore, I cannot blame or protest religious discrimination in Angola. I have no right to do so. I hope you will understand my position now. And, please do not bring other ancillary issues into this discussion. That's just distraction.
You said, "My point is: Angola has banned Islam, so another country will have to retaliate by banning Christianity---that cannot be a wise step."
Now, I can agree with you - this is an extreme reaction, but not totally inappropriate in the realm of appropriate reactions.
__._,_.___
****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration:
Call For Articles:
http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68
http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585
****************************************************
VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/
****************************************************
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
-Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
Saturday, November 30, 2013
Re: [mukto-mona] Angola Bans Islam, Destroys Mosques
In fact, my ethical mind tells me that - I cannot give a pass for such discrimination in one country, for whatever reason, and object it in other countries. That's discrimination, in my view. Therefore, I cannot blame or protest religious discrimination in Angola. I have no right to do so.
>>>>>>>>>>> Very interesting way of looking at things.
According to the chairman of the new parish, Diogene Mahavavy, the Muslim community donated the land after becoming aware of the difficulties that the Anglicans were having in obtaining a plot of land on which to build a new suburban church.
The people of Ambilobe are from the Antakarana tribe, which is predominantly Muslim, Mr. Mahavavy said, but evangelization in the region has resulted in many families having both Muslim and Christian members; mutual support is common.
@ Mr. Chakraborty:
I want to stick to the broader issue – which is - religious discrimination; everything else stems from it.
The world has lost the right to take moral high ground on religious discrimination issue thousands of years back.
Jiten Roy
On Friday, November 29, 2013 6:27 PM, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
As a matter of fact my position should have been clear from my first post in which I talked about possible disastrous effect of the chain reaction of retaliation by competing countries by banning rival religions.
Your 'appropriate' judgment seems to be unethical. Angola has taken away the religious rights of some groups within Angola. Would it not be unethical for another country to take away the religious rights of some other groups? Are you not justifying the demolition of temples in Bangladesh as a reaction to demolition of the Babri Mosque in India?
Sent from my iPhone
Yes, Mr. Chakraborty, now I can understand your point. You have generalized your view in the last post. Dr. Bain promotes generalized views like, "Barbaric acts should not be retaliated with barbaric acts," and you support it. Both of you identify something as barbaric act, but do not support similar reaction to that. This is exactly Gandhism, whether you realize it or not.
Saudi Arabia has practiced religious discrimination for thousands of years, and the world has looked the other way, which has resulted the spreading of religious discrimination (virus) in other Muslim majority countries too. If you think clearly you will have no difficulty to see the host country for this virus. I am puzzled by the fact that you guys have so much difficulty to see this reality. And, in that line of thinking, I judge Angolan action as extreme, but not inappropriate.
Jiten Roy
Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional